# Jai Veer Singh v. State of U.P - **Citation:** (1999) 2 ILRA 218 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 1999 - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/jai-veer-singh-v-state-of-u-p-39323 - **Pages:** 4 ## Text THE INDIAN LAW REPORTS [1999 218 For the reasons discussed above, we come to the conclusion that the uncorroborated testimony of child witnesses namely Km. Yashoda P.W. 1 and Umang alias Billu, P.W. 2 suffers from inherent improbabilities and weaknesses. The possibility cannot be ruled out that the two child witnesses delivered tutored evidence. The accusedappellant could not be convicted on their such testimony,It is wholly doubtful that the accused -appellant was the assailant of the deceased victim. In the result and for the reasons discussed hereinabove, we allow this appeal and set aside the conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentence of life imprisonment passed against the accused appellant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge . The accusedappellant is on bail. He need not surrender. His personal bond and bail bonds are hereby cancelled and sureties discharged. 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 &,9,/ 6,'( &,9,/ 6,'( '$7(' $/ '$7(' $//$+$%$' /$+$%$' %()25( %()25( +21·%/( $. <2* - +21·%/( $. <2* - &,9,/ 0,6& :5,7 3(7,721 12 2) &RPPLWWHH RI 0DQDJHPHQW RI 0LVUL ODO ,QWHU &ROOHJH 0DZDQ\DQ 0LU]DSXU « 3HWLWLRQHU 9V -RLQW 'LUHFWRU RI (GXFDWLRQ %LQGK\DFKDO 0DQGDO 'LVWULFW 0LU]DSXU RWKHUV « 5HVSRQGHQWV &RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU 6. &KDXEH\ &RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQW 6& 6HFWLRQ $ RI 83 ,QWHUPHGLDWH (GXFDWLRQ DFW WKH SURYLVLRQV RI VHFWLRQ $ KDV EHHQ PLVXVHG ERWK E\ WKH SULYDWH OLWLJDQW DV ZHOO DV E\ HGXFDWLRQDO DXWKRULWLHV WKH FRQFHUQHG DXWKRULW\ GLG QRW GHFLGH WKH PDWWHU RI GLVSXWH H[SHGLWLRXVO\ ±IDLOHG WR DFKLHYH WKH REMHFW IRU ZKLFK OHJLVODWXUH LQFRUSRUDWHG VHFWLRQ $ RI WKH $FW WKH DXWKRULW\ PXVW OHQG H[SODQDWLRQ IRU QRW FRPSO\LQJ ZLWK WKH GLUHFWLRQ RI WKH +RQ¶EOH +LJK &RXUW ± WKH 'LVWULFW 0DJLVWUDWH ZDV GLUHFWHG WR WDNH RYHU WKH FKDUJH RI WKH PDQDJHPHQW RI WKH LQVWLWXWLRQ DQG WR FRQYHQH D PHHWLQJ RI WKH JHQHUDO ERG\ LQ RUGHU WR JHW WKH HOHFWLRQ KHOG LQ DFFRUGDQFH ZLWK WKH VFKHPH RI DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ 1999 ------ Jai Veer Singh Vs. State of U.P. ------ Virendra Saran,J. M.C. Jain, J. 1999 ------ August, 24 2 All.] ALLAHABAD SERIES 219 By the Court Through this petition, committee of Management said to be represented by one Raj dhar Dubey, Petitioner alleges that there is an institution called Misri lal Inter college. Mawanyan, Mirzapur, which is being governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, regulation framed thereunder, (for short called the Act) and duly approved scheme of Administration. Copy of Scheme of Administration has been filed as Annexure no. 1 to the petition. Petitioner alleged that an election for constituting Committee of Management of the institution took place on 25.8.1996 but Respondent no. 3, (one Ram singh ) raised dispute and matter was referred to the Deputy Director of Education as contemplated under Section 16(A) 7 of the Act. It is further stated that some dates were fixed by the said authority but matter was not decided. Ultimately petitioner filed a representation before concerned authority to decide representation. The concerned authority pointed out that Respondent no. 3 through out absented and did not appear on any fixed date in spite of notice. And in that view, petitioner requested the authority should decide the matter on merit without waiting for his appearance. It is alleged in the petition that petitioner was forced to file writ petition no. 21773 of 1999 and learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgement and order dated 25.5.1999 directed the concerned authority (respondent no. 1) to decide the matter within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order (Annexure 6 to the petition ). Respondent No.1 has decided the dispute under Section 16 (A)7 of the Act vide order dated August 10,1999. At the out set I would like to mention that authority has not tendered explanation whatsoever for not passing order within time granted by this Court vide judgement and order dated 25.5.1999. there is nothing on record for perusal of this Court at this stage as to why the authority did not comply with the order of this High Court . It is expected that an authority while deciding the matter shall also tender explanation for consideration of the court or of higher authority showing a justifiable cause for not complying with the direction of the High Court . This is the least that an authority is 1999 ------ C/M, M.L. Inter College, Mirzapur Vs. J.D.E., Mirzapur ------ A.K. Yog, J. THE INDIAN LAW REPORTS [1999 220 expected to do. As otherwise , 'concerned authority ' should approach High Court for seeking extension of time by giving facts justifying extension of time. With out going into the merit of the case, Iam of the opinion that the concerned authority did not decide the matter of dispute expeditiously and completely failed to achieve the object for which legislature incorporated Section 16A ( 7) of the Act. Even if parties succeed after expiry of term under law, the college suffers in silence .The dispute remains at an its own place. Existence of dispute pertaining to the management of educational institution, precipitating continuous flow of writ petitions compels this Court to take judicial notice of the same. ProvisionOf Section 16 A(7) has been misused both by the private litigant as well as educational authorities.It is high time, State Government should give a serious thought. As otherwise the pitiable condition of education in the State is bound to be reduced to a brazen dismal. Coming to the present case, I find that authorities failed to decide the dispute and by inaction has rendered itself unfit by passively abusing its official position. In the totality of the circumstances, I direct the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel to submit a certified copy of this judgement before District Magistrate, who shall immediately take over charge of the Management of the institution himself or through an official appointed by him, who shall immediately convene a meeting of the General Body, which shall elect itself an adhoc Committee not exceeding three members and District Magistrate shall command the said Committee to get the election held in accordance with the Scheme of Administration as expeditiously as possible but in no case exceeding three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. Entire proceedings shall be subject to supervision and control of the District Magistrate. List of life membership shall be finalised in general body meeting-convened after due notice under law and also after its being published in Daily News papers having wide circulation in the locality. No party shall be allowed to raise objection before elections are held, and charge is taken over by new Committee of Management. If any party has any grievance, he may file an application in this Court . 1999 ------ C/M, M.L. Inter College, Mirzapur Vs. J.D.E., Mirzapur ------ A.K. Yog, J. 2 All.] ALLAHABAD SERIES 221 $33(//$7( -85,6',&7,21 $33(//$7( -85,6',&7,21 &5,0,1$/ 6,'( &5,0,1$/ 6,'( '$7(' $//+$%$' $8*867 '$7(' $//+$%$' $8*867 %()25( %()25( 7+( +21·%/( 55. 75,9(', - 7+( +21·%/( 55. 75,9(', - 7+( +21·%/( 0& -$,1 - 7+( +21·%/( 0& -$,1 - CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 421 OF 1982 5DMD 5DP DQRWKHU « $SSHOODQWV 9HUVXV 6WDWH RI 83 « 5HVSRQGHQW &RXQVHO IRU WKH $SSHOODQWV 6KUL 51 5DL 6KUL 6KDVKDQN 6KHNKDU 6KUL $' *LUL &RXQVHO IRU WKH 2SSRVLWH SDUW\ '\ *$ 6UL 31 0LVUD 6HFWLRQ RI &U 3& ± WKH FLUFXPVWDQFHV GR QRW IRUP D FRQWLQXRXV FKDLQ H[FOXGLQJ HYHU\ SRVVLELOLW\ H[FHSWLQJ WKH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW LW ZHUH WKH DSSHOODQWV RU DQ\ RI WKHP ZKR FRPPLWWH WKH PXUGHU WKHUH DUH VHYHUDO GDUN VSRWV ZKLFK VKDNH WKH SURVHFXWLRQ VWRU\ $SSHDO $OORZHG By the Court The two appellants Raja Ram and Ram Jas have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 12.2.1982 passed by Sri D.S. Ram the then IIIrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Ghazipur in Sessions Trial No. 352 of 1980 whereby each of them has been convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment. One Parvez Khan son of Shahzada Khan, aged about 19 years was murdered in this incident which took place on 27th November, 1978 at about 6.45 P.M. at the house of the complainant Abul Hasan, P.S. Gahmar, District Ghazipur. The deceased was the son of the elder brother of the complainant and had come to the village from Calcutta about 2 or 2-1/2 months before the incident, as he was to go to Aligarh for further education. Due to riots in Aligarh he was staying in the village. He was about to leave for Aligarh next day of the incident. The F.I.R. was lodged by Abul Hasan, P.W. 1 at the 1999 ------ August, 19